PDF The Relevance of Science to Psychology

Chapter 1 - CF

1

CHAPTER 1

The Relevance of Science to Psychology

I. The Challenge You Face

II. Resulting Onus: What You Accept as Your Obligation

A. Do what it takes to be ethical 1. do unto others as you would have them do unto you 2. greatest good for greatest number 3. others' interest before self interest 4. efficiently eliminate ignorance or relieve suffering 5. deal with your limitations honestly

B. Review: the onus to be ethical C. Do what it takes to be prosperous

1. good job 2. security 3. upward mobility 4. job satisfaction 5. provide for you and your family 6. recreation D. Review: the onus to be prosperous

III. Knowing What You Are Doing Will Make You Ethical and Prosperous

A. Separate illusion from reality B. Solve problems C. Function without supervision D. Ability to implement recondite information E. Make consistent progress F. Be effective and be able to prove it

IV. Conceptual Precursor: "Truth" and "Understanding"

V. Understanding the Truth is What it Means to Know What You're Doing

A. Demand what is labeled "truth" 1. actual definition or meaning of "truth" a. empirical

Chapter 1 - CF

2

b. reliable c. multiple converging evidence d. consensually validated e. operationally / functionally defined

i. ontological validity ii. correspondence with referent iii. conceptual fine point: nominalism versus essentialism f. coda: science, truth, and belief B. Have what is labeled "understanding" 1. actual definition or meaning of "understanding" a. describe b. predict c. control d. synthesize e. explain f. coda: something can be true but not understood

VI. Overview of the Obligation You Acknowledge

VII. Label for Activity that Makes You Ethical and Prosperous

VIII. Conceptual Follow-Up: Truth, Understanding, Reality, and Pragmatism

IX. Summary

A. Scientific psychology satisfies your onus 1. to be ethical 2. to be prosperous

B. graphic illustrating the logic underlying the choice of science

Chapter 1 - CF

3

CHAPTER 1

The Relevance of Science to Psychology

It is because of science's track record in producing desirable results that psychology is moving toward "science" as fast as it can. Science is only one of many ways of viewing the world. However it should be realized that science, which specifically rejects trying-to-do-good has produced more good than any other system. It seems that being focused on correctly understanding nature has the side effect of producing "good." Whereas being concerned with "good" very often has the side effect of producing half truths, misunderstanding, and horror (the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, and Auschwitz).

Science does not produce statements that get to be labeled "the Truth." Rather, what we mean by the ground rule only-demonstrable-real-world-truth has come to be labeled science. The correspondence between science and truth is NOT because there is some ineffable thing "truth" and science reveals it, rather, that which science reveals defines truth. Truth has no further meaning.

A key to understanding the activity labeled science; what it is, what it's not, why it's emphasized in courses such as this, and why you should follow its guidelines lies in the way it came about. It did not come into existence when some authority figure defined a creed called "Science"; and then began ordaining people as "Scientists" if they took the oath. Science came about when people who demanded to know the truth and who demanded to understand what they were doing were seen as a group and came to be called scientists. The procedures that avoided erroneous conclusions and which lead to correct predictions came to be called the scientific method. These methods of science are best seen as conventions that have evolved through the pressure brought about by a primary emphasis on correctly connecting to the world. Science is simply man's attempt to keep from being deceived by nature.

When you have something important at stake you demand what you label truth. You should be no less scientific when the body of knowledge or the welfare of your patient is at stake. The following anecdote illustrates that whenever it matters to you, you already know enough to demand the truth, and to understand what's going on (i.e., to be scientific). Suppose that you and I were going to bet $100.00 on the outcome of a coin toss. I flip; you call heads while it is in the air; it lands, I cover it, sneak a look, call it tails, and quickly put it in my pocket. You would not pay. You would demand that you see an outcome before believing it or you would require that trustworthy people see an outcome and report it to you. The fact is, if you are uncertain about something that is personally important, you appeal to direct observation as your final arbiter. It is what you can experience for yourself that ultimately determines what you accept as truth. If

Chapter 1 - CF

4

someone tells you something, you assess its truth by asking whether or not you can experience it directly or indirectly; whether there are several lines of evidence supporting it; whether the information is consistent with information from several other sources which are generally reliable or whether the information is consistent with what you already know is factual. When this informal notion of appealing to direct observation is used in an explicit, open, and consistent fashion, it is called the scientific method.

There is occasional resistance to the idea that psychology can be scientific. This resistance is based in a belief that behavior can never be understood, i.e., be measurable, analyzable, or controllable. This objection typically takes one of two forms: that behavior is capricious and without a cause, or alternatively, that behavior can be understood only by methods that are incomprehensible, unlearnable, or innate in a few very special people. (This latter view is typically argued most vociferously, of course, by people who think that they have that special skill.) The objections to scientific psychology are obviously not true when one considers the many professions that exist because of their ability to routinely change behavior on command, such as advertising, public relations, entertainment, education, and politics. However, even if the objections to the comprehendibility of behavior are partly true we should get on with understanding what we can understand, and not be stultified by what at best is only a half truth. We should assume that we can have an impact on behavior unless proven otherwise.

I. The Challenge You Face

If I were to ask you to list five good things about lynching someone, you would, after the shock of the apparent oxymoron wore off, put down that it's quick, inexpensive, requires no difficult or complex preparation, and that those who do it claim that it's appropriate, and that they enjoy it because they're helping society. If I were to ask you to list 5 bad things about civil law, you would point out that it is slow, expensive, requires a lot of preparation and work, and is stressful because it must be done right and isn't always fun.

The challenge faced by someone interested in psychology is analogous to that faced by a judge. We can do to our readers and patients what feels intuitively satisfying and what does not require taking difficult courses or we can become properly prepared at whatever the cost to do what is objectively the best thing possible. In criminal justice, no one argues that the easy path (lynching) is better than the hard path (civil law). We should be equally offended when someone in psychology wants to do things in some particular way simply because it is the easiest way to graduate and has the least homework.

Chapter 1 - CF

5

The following step by step explicit reasoning shows that science is relevant and even essential to psychologists involved in either the application of psychology (psychotherapy) or to the discovery of new behavioral principles (research).

II. Resulting Onus: What You Accept as Your Obligation

The first step in building a logical foundation for your practice of psychology is to decide what is at the heart of your system of wants, beliefs or values. An onus is the most primitive or most basic demand a person feels obliged to meet, even if it is not fun and even if it is not easy. Generally these are obligations so basic as to require no justification. The logic of this section addresses itself to the question: is there any reason for you to do anything other than the easiest, fastest, simplest most natural thing that any 15-year old already does in the practice of your profession? Is there any reason to know anything more than you already know or to behave any differently? Is there any reason to expend the extra effort to actually "see the dolphin" rather than simply going around saying what you know by intuition?

A. Do What it Takes to be Ethical People often verbalize that they are willing to work hard in order to be ethical. It is important to provide a clear operational definition of what it is to be ethical by enumerating instances of being ethical. The following set includes some of the typical things that people consider obligatory.

1. Do Unto Others as You Would Have Them Do Unto You You would want to go to a maximally competent therapist who understands what is really going on and how to fix your problem. You would want to read a maximally revealing paper that helps you understand what processes actually occurred.

2. Greatest Good for Greatest Number In complex situations where no simple "completely right" versus "completely wrong" decision can be made, a maximizing rule only makes sense. Any decision should be based on an understanding of the big picture rather than a first, narrow impression. What is the best answer for the larger perspective out of the

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download